This copy is for your personal non-commercial use only. To order presentation-ready copies of Toronto Star content for distribution to colleagues, clients or customers, or inquire about permissions/licensing, please go to: www.TorontoStarReprints.com

After nearly five years, an investigation by the police watchdog and a coroner’s inquest, Evan Jones’ grieving family still feel the young man’s death is unresolved.

Jones, an 18-year-old who struggled with depression, substance abuse and suicidal thoughts, was shot dead by Brantford Police Const. Adam Hill inside his family living room on Aug. 25, 2010.

Moments before being struck by four bullets, Jones wielded a butcher knife and a meat cleaver, told police to shoot him and threw a knife in Hill’s direction.

In January 2011, the Special Investigations Unit, the police watchdog that probes fatal incidents involving police, ruled Hill was not criminally liable because he believed a fellow officer was in imminent danger.

The decision was greatly disappointing to his family — “another layer in the troubling dimension of the death of their son,” said Glenn Stuart, the Jones’ lawyer.

Article Continued Below

“From their perspective, and from the information that they’ve seen and heard and had at the time ... a different result would have been appropriate,” Stuart said.

Monica Hudon, spokesperson for the SIU, said she cannot comment on the new information while the new probe into Hill’s death is ongoing.

But, generally speaking, she said “materially new” information is evidence the SIU did not initially have at the time of the investigation, but that could have impacted the SIU director’s ultimate decision whether to lay a criminal charge.

That could include previously unseen video, the discovery of a new witness or fresh information from a witness.

Stuart said the new information did not come from Jones’ family and they have not been told what it is.

On the night of Jones’ death, his mother called 911 seeking assistance because her son was having a physical outburst. When officers arrived, they found Jones holding the knives.

After repeatedly telling Jones to drop the weapons, Hill sprayed Jones with pepper spray. According to the SIU, the spray didn’t affect Jones, and he later raised a meat cleaver over his head and turned toward a direction that Hill “reasonably thought another officer was situated,” the SIU ruled.

In 2012, an Ontario coroner’s inquest examined the circumstances of Jones’ death, but Stuart said it did not uncover a significant amount of new information.

Part of the problem, Stuart said, was that contrary to normal practice, Hill did not testify at the inquest because he was on medical leave. (Brantford Police spokesperson Const. Natalie Laing would not confirm Thursday if Hill has returned to the force, saying it was personal employee information).

Though Stuart argued Hill’s testimony at the inquest was vital to understanding the death, presiding coroner Dr. Jack Stanborough ruled it would pose a significant risk to Hill’s health.

Hill was therefore not cross-examined, Stuart said. The officer’s police notes were used at the inquest, but they were written prior to the recent Supreme Court Canada ruling banning police officers under investigation by a civilian watchdog from using a lawyer to help them prepare their notes, Stuart said.

During his five-year tenure, there were only a handful of investigations Scott opted to re-examine. The bulk of them related to investigations involving police brutality during Toronto’s G20 Summit, and were reopened when fresh evidence, including video, came to light.

More from the Toronto Star & Partners

LOADING

Copyright owned or licensed by Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or distribution of this content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Toronto Star Newspapers Limited and/or its licensors. To order copies of Toronto Star articles, please go to: www.TorontoStarReprints.com